Of course I’d blame Walmart for forcing me to go shop elsewhere. If they had kept things status quo (say they lowered products quality, changed hours of operation, relocated further from me, or made it unsafe for me to shop there), I wouldn’t have had to go shop elsewhere at higher prices. It’s not my whim to suddenly go shop elsewhere without reason. Especially if I warned Walmart that if they move to another part of town, they’ll be too far and I’ll stop shopping there. It’s my decision but it’s directly attributable to Walmart’s actions without which I’d still shop there at lower prices.
Now you are adding criteria that directly affects the purchase decision. But we didnt stop buying Russian oil because it was suddenly lower quality, or because the Russian oil wells suddenly relocated to the moon. We stopped buying it for a reason entirely unrelated to the purchase of oil.
You are taking a stand and refusing to shop there because you think Walmart should give all their employees paid maternity leave, which has absolutely no effect on your ability to buy bread. So who’s fault is it that you are now paying more for that bread elsewhere?
Again, I understand, and even agree with, the concept of taking a stand on principle. But when you do you, you also need to own the consequences of that stand. Otherwise you’re just a typical Kindergartener. Teacher: “Shandril, why did you hit little Johnny with that toy?” Shandril: “Johnny made me do it!” 
But he did make me do it. He stole my lunch so I had no other option but to hurt him so he does not do it again because you dear teacher (the UN) won’t do anything about it nor will you return my lunch he has now eaten!
We’d never have imposed the sanctions that caused the spike in energy prices if not for the Russian invasion. And in terms of options, none of the other actions were really on the table (support like China, do nothing like India, escalate the conflict into WW3). As such we had no choice but use sanctions. Russia made us do it. 100%.
Sure, we have free will. We could have done any of those, including nothing. It’s all a calculation for what we want to happen, and apparently our Dear Leader wants us all to pay more for goods, the Ukrainians to die resisting, and Russia to level a few more cities. So much for peace in our time.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-16/ukraine-update-un-calls-for-unimpeded-access-to-besieged-cities
https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-calls-on-ukraines-surrounded-mariupol-forces-to-surrender-11650188920
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said talks with Russia are at a “dead end because we will not trade our territory and our people.” If Russian forces follow through on a threat to destroy the remaining Ukrainian troops fighting in Mariupol, that would “put an end” to talks, he said in an interview with Ukrainian online media.
I’m not sure whether Z is talking a hard line because he believes really it, because he thinks it will help him in securing more foreign aid or in negotiations with Russia later, or if he’s afraid his Nazis will kill him if he is willing to try to actually negotiate a peaceful end to the war (no doubt with loss of territory and some national sovereignty). It wouldn’t be the first time that happened there.
1 Like
And again, you are adding criteria to try to justify the position. Little Johnny was off in the corner doing stuff with with some other kids, not stealing your lunch. So again, why’d you hit him when he was minding his own business, not doing anything that affected you?
Um, there was nothing forcing us to do anything at all. Russia didnt invade Hawaii. The desire to take action is based entirely on imposing our own principles on others, not any sort of necessity. We imposed these sanctions simply because we dont like what Russia is doing, not because we were forced to react.
We imposed these sanctions simply because we dont like what Russia is doing, not because we were forced to react.
You’re right that Putin didn’t impose financial repercussions on us in some way. The US and other countries chose to accept that there would be repercussions for them imposing major sanctions on Russia, as part of an effort to hold Russia accountable for violating international law (and hopefully help Ukraine’s prospects in addition to the military supplies being provided).
So while not “mandatory” action, it was certainly “necessary” action, because otherwise, countries are writing Russia a blank check to go invade anyone they think they can win against that isn’t part of NATO.
That said, I think the rhetoric about root causes and direct fault is poorly delivered.
While I won’t be quite as humble and declare there is “no question”, I believe you added a not-so-subtle, but not-well-defined qualifier. The price of gasoline, over the last 24 months has more than doubled. 
As I see it, the price of gas rose 100% before the war (be it Putin’s, Biden’s or Madonna’s) began. Since the evil Socialist/Communist/Progressives invaded Ukraine, the price of gas is up about 20%. I think there is no question that you commented on the previous 100% rise in gas prices. Try as I might, I couldn’t find your post(s) about the Biden Price HIke. Sadly, my woeful search skills are an embarrassment. I’m sure you can point me to it. 
4 Likes
Price of gas was about $2.40 on 1/19/21 and $3.30 a year later. I’m not sure about how useful the 100% aggregate increase is to your argument since the increase from $1.74 to $2.40 would be Trump’s responsibility since it occurred during his presidency. Anyway, I totally agree that gas prices rose way before the invasion and that should not be blamed on Putin.
That part is more due to OPEC dragging their feet to increase production back when economies restarted and Trump+Biden’s failure to convince them or domestic producers to ramp up production.
But the sharp rise from 02/2022 on the graph, I’m not sure how you’d explain it any other way than due to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
I would assert that Putin invaded Ukraine following an interval of time when Biden, with malice of forethought, had already tied the hands and bound and gagged the entire American energy complex so it was unable to react to Putin. This Biden did in service to his fanatical global climate change supporters, who would settle for nothing less.
If you check you will find that, only in the last week or two, Biden has loosened a few of his strictures. But it is FAR too little, too late. Biden loosened up just a little on drilling. But drilling is not our primary problem. To counter Putin, and to bring prices way down, we need pipeline . . . in many places. And Biden has done, and is doing, virtually NOTHING in that realm. Nor has he any such plans.
3 Likes
The $1.74 is from a time when they literally couldnt give away gas/oil due to sudden covid shutdowns. Most of that increase to $2.40 was merely coincidential due to having picked an artifically low starting point.
April 2020 is a piss poor time to use to evaluate gas prices no matter what you are trying to show.
1 Like
Well blame @xerty since he posted that very same chart in Oct 2021.
Im not blaming anyone, just pointing out that April 2020 gas prices don’t contribute anything to any argument anyone tries to make. Supporting your questioning of the usefulness.
2 Likes
I guess the environment doesn’t matter if you can’t get re-elected to take credit for it. Drilling leases previously blocked are now available again.
If he didn’t loosen up on drilling, you’d say that drilling was our primary problem. No point in having a pipeline if there’s nothing to use it for, right?
Also, I understand “want pipeline,” but why do we “need pipeline?” How much does it really cost per delivered unit of the final product vs trains or ships or whatever else?
US Natural gas prices surged to the highest level in 13-years on a confluence of factors, including shrinking inventory levels, strong export demand to Europe, and colder temperatures.
Futures rose to $8.05 per million British thermal units during Asian trading, about double since the beginning of the year…
For context - on an oil-barrel-equivalent basis, US NatGas is now trading at $136 (vs $109 current oil price)
1 Like
Bullard talking +0.75% as possible
- FED’S BULLARD: INFLATION FAR TOO HIGH FOR COMFORT; FED HAS A GOOD PLAN IN PLACE
- BULLARD: HOPEFUL BAL-SHEET RUNOFF TO START AT COMING MEETING
- BULLARD: WE WANT TO GET TO NEUTRAL RATES EXPEDITIOUSLY
- BULLARD: DON’T WANT TO DISRUPT MKTS BUT NEED TO MOVE QUICKLY
- FED’S BULLARD: 3.5% IS THE MINIMUM FED FUNDS RATE NEEDED; CAN’T DO IT ALL AT ONCE, BUT SHOULD TRY TO GET THERE BY THE END OF THE YEAR
- BULLARD: BASE CASE IS NOT FOR MORE THAN 50 BPS AT ANY MEETING
- BULLARD: MORE THAN 50-BP INCREASE ISN’T MY BASE CASE NOW
- BULLARD: WON’T RULE OUT 75-BP INCREASE BUT IT ISN’T BASE CASE
- BULLARD: U.S. 2022, 2023 GDP GROWTH TO BE HIGHER THAN TREND
- BULLARD: JOBLESS RATE TO STAY WHERE IT IS OR FALL FURTHER
- BULLARD: JOBLESS RATE MAY GO BELOW 3% IN 2022
- BULLARD: BIGGEST INFLATION DETERMINANT IS PRICE EXPECTATIONS
- BULLARD: IT MIGHT BE REASONABLE IF HOUSING MARKET COOLS OFF A BIT
- BULLARD: RUSSIA WAR PRICE IMPACT MORE CONCERNING FOR U.S.
- FED’S BULLARD: WOULD BE OPEN TO A ‘REVERSE TWIST’ ALTHOUGH FOR NOW HAPPY TO GO AHEAD WITH PASSIVE RUNOFF PLAN FOR FED’S BALANCE SHEET
That last part means “no quant tightening, just slow maturity and non-repurchase of Fed balance sheet”. So he’s more aggressive on hikes but less so on balance sheet.
1 Like
Nice
3 Likes
Really, I would not. Biden is only in control of drilling on Federal lands. I do not care about that.
It’s in the realm of pipeline that the “keep it in the ground” nut cases have hit us hardest. Lack of pipeline is strangling production. We cannot get the product, in sufficient quantity, to where it is needed most.
Actually trains and trucks. It’s not about cost as much as it is about safety. Even Secretary Buttigieg has said pipeline is the safest way to transport oil and natural gas.
We need pipeline to get the product to terminals where it is loaded onto ships.
1 Like
My source says natl avg. gasoline price on 1/18/21 was $2.46, and on 2/21/22 (three days before the invasion, I think) the price had risen to $3.62. That’s a 47% increase.
Ha Ha! So,
-
The 15% increase in gasoline prices after the war started is Putin’s fault.
-
The 47% increase in gasoline prices from President Joseph Robinette Biden’s inauguration until the war started is OPEC’s fault.
So, it appears my previous comment that if the buck doesn’t stop in the Big Guy’s pocket, it stops at the Kremlin is erroneous, and I will now amend it to read …
If the buck doesn’t stop in the Big Guy’s (or his family organization’s) pocket, it stops anywhere else.
1 Like