Cool, so we agree that presidents have little to do with gas prices!
Prices climbed under Presidents Ford and Carter ($2.71), fell under Ronald Reagan ($2.49), rose under George H.W. Bush, then plunged under Bill Clinton ($1.70).In fact, Democrats have occupied the White House when gas prices were at their highest (Wilson) and their lowest (Clinton).Some analysts suggest that US economic performance is strongly influenced by whether energy costs are rising or falling. Falling gas prices help explain the rapid growth of the 1950s and '60s and the boom under Clinton.But it's equally true that world events, not presidents, have had the biggest impact on gas prices. Carter didn't cause the second Arab oil embargo, he scrambled to contain its effects. Clinton didn't cause Saudi Arabia to flood the market with oil in its attempt to regain discipline and control among OPECmembers, although he benefited from it.
Are gas prices lower under Democratic or Republican presidents?
Gas prices have varied from $1.70 to $3.40 a gallon over the past 100 years of presidents, according to a new infographic. Can you guess who was in office when average gas prices were at their highest? Their lowest?www.csmonitor.com
Not directly, only because in a free market, you can have dozens of counter forces.
But of course every policy has an effect. Anything that changes the supply and demand system, has an effect of some sort. It would be ridiculous to say otherwise.
Does that mean if you pass a law that reduces oil supplies, that prices must go up? No. Because there are other factors.
For example, say you have three oil fields, and all are set to increase production by 100%, doubling their output. Then say that the government full of left-wingers, passes a law preventing the increase in production from one of the oil fields located on government owned land.
Does that mean the price of oil will go up? No, the price may still go down, because production over all even with the negative oil production harming law, went up.
In fact, say the government was even more stupid, and cut production at the one oil field. Does that mean the price will go up? Not if the other two fields increase product by so much that the lack of production from the one, is over shadowed.
So even a policy that is directly harming the entire country, might by the power of a free market system, be completely covered up.
This is why many right-wing people like myself, routinely say that the economy recovered not because of X stupid policy, but rather in spite of that policy.
Again, none of that changes the fact that the policy still had an effect. If you didn't have those oil production restricting policies.... oil prices would have fallen MORE. Supply and demand is universal. It never changes. Anything that restricts the supply of any product does have an effect.
Cool, so we agree that presidents have little to do with gas prices!
Depends. If the president made signed an executive order that harms the supply, then..... yes he does have something to do with prices. Does not mean that prices will go up or down, because there are other market effects.... but he most certainly had something to do with the price.
Carter didn't cause the second Arab oil embargo
I want you to read that part of the article carefully. This is why Trump, and right-wingers like myself, call the major media outlets fake news.
There was no second Arab oil Embargo. There was only one. In 1973. Carter wasn't president until 1977.
Further, the energy crisis was directly the result of price controls and regulations. The government had oil prices pegged at as low as $6 a barrel, at a time when the price of oil on the world market was $30.
There was no Arab Embargo under Carter. What happens when the government says you can only buy and sell oil at $6/barrel, when the market price is $30/barrel? The same thing that happens in Venezuela, when you put price controls on Rice.
You end up with Shortages. Carter didn't fight and try and control the energy crisis. He was part of the cause.
However, there is a lesson to be learned from this. There is no magical meaning to the letter "R" or the letter "D". And when you compare prices between presidents, and say "the price went up with President X, and down with President Y, and up again with President Z"....
that doesn't mean anything. What matters is the policies that are put in place. Putting in place a socialist policy when you are a republican, doesn't mean the policy is no socialist. Nor is putting in a Capitalist free-market policy, if you are Democrat, means it's socialist now.
My point from this is, that if you look at the history, Nixion is the one who first started the policies of Price Controls. Equally, although Carter supported price controls most of his administration, which lead to the energy crisis, at the end of his term, he was phasing out price controls, and returning to a free market system.
You can't make any assumptions just because of what party someone belongs to. You can make assumptions based on what policies they support. Government intervention policies always fail. Capitalist free-market policies always work.
