corporate overlords of wrongdoing
It isn't because they need the implicit threat of police violence in order to exist and so are willing to pay handsomely for it... is it?
1. Oil companies set oil prices not the president of the United States. To think otherwise is to misunderstand who is actually in charge of this country.
2. Biden made a request for the oil companies not to gouge the American people and the oil companies ignored this polite suggestion. History shows that corporations only adopt ethical buisness practices when they are forced too. Biden would have had to do more than request if he was serious about lowering fuel prices and I would not take you seriously if you suggested that he did not realize this.
3. Nothing. Trump is if anything an even bigger supporter of big oil. Process under the trump administration would be equally high (you might argue even higher but again the president of the United states does not set gas prices.)
Oil prices would not be high under Trump
It turns out that the buck stops with the guy at the top. So, the default assumption is that if you're in charge, you're responsible for what happens on your watch. Your OP contends: (1) there are problems on Biden's watch, yet (2) the burden of proof for causation is somehow on those who claim he is responsible for things that occur on his watch. Further, you OP inquires what Biden's alternative might have done, implicitly contending (3) these events were inevitable (i.e., not the result of Biden's doing).
Responsibility is not that simple. In a complex government, economy and public/private interplay, numerous stakeholders bear overlapping levels of responsibility for macro-level outcomes. Lean into the complexity to understand causation, but realize the buck still stops with the guy in charge.
What happened on January 6th was regretful, but it is a far cry from the fiasco as portrayed in the media. Assigning blame for the fiction created by democrats in the media is beneath futility.
- Domestic policy. Biden is singularly responsible for setting the legislative agenda, as the head of his political party (or figurehead, as it may be).
- "Green New Deal." The legislative agenda's top priority is a so called "Green New Deal." Numerous aspects of the so called "Green New Deal" impact gas prices, directly and indirectly.
- Directly, the "Green New Deal" reduces supply. For example, when Biden delayed decisions on new oil and gas drilling on federal land and other energy-related actions, including indefinitely delaying planned oil and gas lease sales on public lands in a half-dozen states in the West, including Wyoming, Montana and Utah, that clearly signaled to the market that less oil would be domestically produced. Biden has done the same thing for offshore drilling. And that is one example of many such actions that have acutely undermined the domestic supply, and anticipated future supply, of petrochemical resources (e.g., Biden's idiocy over Keystone).
- Indirectly, the "Green New Deal" signals the end of robust federal support for domestic drilling. The American oil industry is very heavily subsidized, often to the extent that most investment in expanded drilling capacity amounts to a low or no-risk proposition. The Green New Deal guts the support the oil industry has received since forever, that it has always relied on. With these developments, expanded oil production capacity is almost totally off the table. Even if expansion was possible, capital markets are a disaster right now and no one can get financing.
- So, even if a company wanted to bet against political trends and expand, for example, offshore drilling in Alaska, managed somehow (despite the Biden Administration's best efforts) to secure new leases on federal lands and actually managed approval through the process despite the Green New Deal's new regulatory throttling, they still probably couldn't even get funding at rates that are commercially acceptable.
- You've got to consider this five, ten or twenty years down the road. There is a concept called "peak oil." "Peak oil" is when we have produced the most oil we ever will. After that time, oil production declines as the world transitions to an alternative energy replacement (whatever that might be, remains to be seen). We probably hit peak oil in 2019, assuming Biden's "green" bullshit isn't reversed by the next administration, because of how prematurely Biden's incompetent advisors moved.
- Often, these harms manifest in other bizarre ways. For example, Biden's Department of the Interior continues to "reform" oil and gas leases throughout the United States, based on its purported commitment to "ensure" that such leases "account for climate impacts." Basically, interior is trying to strap a present-day excise on drilling rights (i.e., money that has to be paid to pump oil out of the ground, because of the hypothesized "climate impact" of doing so). This is the stupidest thing any administration has ever done, and even Obama opposed it because he, aside from recognizing its stupidity, realized the harm it would cause as those costs radiated throughout the economy as a whole. Despite this known risks, the Biden Administration and congressional democrats have pushed through this ridiculous excise policy that is going to artificially increase the cost of oil production. Wanna guess who will pay for it? Consumers, of course. All of this tells speculators that the domestic supply of oil is going to be acutely reduced, yet we have not and will not in any near term move to a world where there's something like any kind of viable alternative. Demand is going to remain. That just means everything --- and I mean literally, everything --- is going to cost more to produce, because oil prices are at the bottom of all of it.
- Economic policy. Biden is responsible for the country's economic policy. Period. There are so many aspects to this I don't have time to list them all in appropriate detail. But here's something to keep in mind . . . .
- Oil is --- or was, before Joe Biden --- bought and sold only in United States Dollars. The dollar is a commodity-backed fiat currency, more or less. This means that the United States has a competitive advantage in purchasing oil internationally, to the extent it cannot meet its domestic needs (however close we got under Obama and Trump).
- However, that competitive advantage is lost when the dollar's strength relative to other global currencies declines. As you may be aware, the dollar's purchasing power relative to other currencies --- even to the extent inflated by global COVID idiocy --- has declined acutely. We are talking like 7% inflation, which is mortifying. And it's probably worse than that. So, when oil is bought on international markets, all of that means it costs more American currency than it did before. That means consumers pay a higher price at the pump.
- Foreign policy. Biden is singularly responsible for setting American foreign policy, as the "sole organ" thereof, commander in chief and all that jazz. Biden's foreign policy has been catastrophic for oil at numerous levels, a handful of which I'll discuss below.
- Ukraine. With the possible exception of the OPEC embargo in the 1970s, Ukraine has been the most singularly catastrophic geopolitical development for world energy markets. The reasons why are obvious. Russia is one of the world's largest oil exporters, and it exercises control over numerous major stakeholders which themselves have tremendous market influence. Iran is the figure that you should be thinking about, there. Together, they can drive the global price of oil to a very considerable extent --- and they have, with incredible force since Biden failed to prevent Putin's invasion of that country.
- To be clear, Biden is not the only president who failed to check Russian aggression. Fault for that predates him by multiple administrations, from Bush, to Obama to Trump, and now Biden. But Biden made the same mistake as his three recent predecessors, albeit to an even more egregious degree. When Russia stacked 100k and then nearly 200k troops on Ukraine's border on all sides, the best he could do is send Antony Blinken to threaten economic sanctions. Mark Milley was too busy being a pathetic gimp.
- Biden's failure to defend Ukraine militarily was a green light to invasion. Which is exactly what happened. That alone would have been sufficient to disrupt global oil supply, and acutely drive up gas prices. But instead, Biden had the brilliant idea to kick Russia off of SWIFT, and otherwise segregate that country from the world financial system. Turns out that when you kick one of the world's largest oil producers off the world's banking regime, that disrupts oil markets, resulting in higher prices. Shocker.
- But the harm to American gas prices did not end there. When Biden sanctioned Russia, Russia and other countries started trading in currencies that were NOT THE DOLLAR, which further (and will continue to erode) the United States' advantage in global energy markets overall. For some reason, Biden's people missed that elephant in the room.
Oil companies control supply artificially in much the same way as the diamond industry.
"Gouged" is presented Biden's word not mine. I am only reporting on the content of his request. I am in favor of comprehensive public transportation in place of personal vehicles to reduce the price the general public pays for fuel.
Oil prices are not set by the president of the United states.
If we assume that they are set by unfettered supply and demand as you suggest then the prices are exactly where they should be and having a different president would not lead to different fuel pricing.
If we assume that I am correct and the woul companies artificially control the supply then prices are exactly where the oil companies want them and a different president would not lead to different pricing.
Unless you are arguing that the president can force the oil companies to lower their prices despite the market and/or against their will (in which case Biden was foolish to only suggest) then the prices would not be appreciably different.
I explained why they would be lower under Trump above. Your understanding of economics is telling.
The guy is a clueless Marxist. To a Marxist, everything grows on trees.
Oil companies control supply artificially in much the same way as the diamond industry.They aren’t though. They want to drill and frack, but Biden denied permits. Therefore Biden is decreasing supply, not the companies.
What would Trump have done to prevent these should be have won in 2020? (Be specific and explain the actual impact)
Perhaps... or perhaps there are in excess of 9000 drilling permits already not being used amd the industry is simply always willing to take advantage of any shortage (or supposed shortage) to aquire more permits to hoard against the future.
Can you provide some actual evidence that any of the things you listed made a noticable difference? Cause it sounds like you are just parroting talking points you heard on Fox news with no idea what you're talking about.
Perhaps... or perhaps there are in excess of 9000 drilling permits already not being used amd the industry is simply always willing to take advantage of any shortage (or supposed shortage) to aquire more permits to hoard against the future.Nope, too costly to get permits. They aren't going to act against their own financial interests.
Why are you asking grey parrot to make an argument for why having less supply of oil would cause prices in oil to rise? Have you seriously never heard of supply and demand?
What I'm saying is that they already have permits which they are not using for one reason or another.
