Why gas in the U.S. is so cheap

Ford SportTrac Forum

Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Sep 16, 2001
Messages
8,448
Reaction score
3
Location
Roseville/Sacramento, CA
CNNMoney.com

Why gas in the U.S. is so cheap

Thursday May 1, 12:18 pm ET

By Steve Hargreaves, CNNMoney.com staff writer





Despite daily headlines bemoaning record gas prices, the U.S. is actually one of the cheaper places to fill up in the world.

Out of 155 countries surveyed, U.S. gas prices were the 45th cheapest, according to a recent study from AIRINC, a research firm that tracks cost of living data.



The difference is staggering. As of late March, U.S. gas prices averaged $3.45 a gallon. That compares to over $8 a gallon across much of Europe, $12.03 in Aruba and $18.42 in Sierra Leone.



The U.S. has always fought to keep gas prices low, and the current debate among presidential candidates on how to keep them that way has been fierce.



But those cheap gas prices - which Americans have gotten used to - mean they feel price spikes like the ones we're experiencing now more acutely than citizens from other nations which have had historically more expensive fuel.



Cheap gas prices have also lulled Americans into a cycle of buying bigger cars and bigger houses further away from their work - leaving them more exposed to rising prices, some experts say.



Price comparisons are not all created equal. Comparing gas prices across nations is always difficult. For starters, the AIRINC numbers don't take into account different salaries in different countries, or the different exchange rates. The dollar has lost considerable ground to the euro recently. Because oil is priced in dollars, rising oil prices aren't as hard on people paying with currencies which are stronger than the dollar, as they can essentially buy more oil with their money as the dollar falls in value.



And then there's the varying distances people drive, the public transportation options available, and the different services people get in exchange for high gas prices. For example, Europe's stronger social safety net, including cheaper health care and higher education, is paid for partly through gas taxes.



Gas price: It's all about government policy. Gasoline costs roughly the same to make no matter where in the world it's produced, according to John Felmy, chief economist for the American Petroleum Institute. The difference in retail costs, he said, is that some governments subsidize gas while others tax it heavily.



 
Good post. I have said this a few times, that gas is $8.00+ per gallon in Poland, and the average person earns $600/month. As a result, most people get to work on foot or by public transportation. Those of us that live out of town and away from public transportation pay huge fuel bills unless we have a very fuel-efficient vehicle. That is why you hardly ever see a Sport Trac on the roads here. Those that do drive them are wealthy and don't worry about filling up at $200 per tankful.
 
Nelson,



So true. Lets also not forget that the cost of goods they buy are proportional to the money they make. So since they make an average of $600.00/month, the important things like housing, food, and clothing are cheaper to compensate for the lower wages. Interesting thing to note is that thier public transportation is a viable source of transportation. I am sure it is reliable and on time...unlike the majority of the public transportation we have in the States. If we had a public transportation as nice as the ones in Germany has, I would park all my vehicles and use it.



Unfortunatly, it would take me two hours to go to work riding the bus and then I would have to walk 13 miles to go home since the busses shut down in the evening.





Tom
 
Tom,



Housing and clothing are very expensive here, compared to Oklahoma, where I lived before.



Most young people live with their parents. This includes young couples. Only the wealthier children don't have to live with parents after they are married. Most families live in two room flats (not two bedrooms, but two rooms, not counting the kitchen and bathroom). One of my best friends here owns a one-room flat (which is about 100 sq ft in size), which is very typical. Her sofa is also her bed. She is currently renting it out for $250/month. The renter pays the gas and electric, which will be another $150/mo on average.



There is no Wal-Mart here, so I can't buy a shirt for $9.00. I have to go to a shop in the mall and pay $20 - $30 for a shirt, or order online from the US. A pair of normal Levis will cost at least $100. The typical average Joe goes to a second-hand clothing store. These are huge here.



Food is reasonable, except for beef. Most of my Polish friends eat beef only occasionally. I am the same here, since I like chicken better. Their meals usually include a very nice soup and also a huge portion of vegetables along with the main course. Some cannot afford to eat meat at all, and survive on vegetables and beans. Maybe on special days they will have a fish or kielbasa (sausage). They have become vegetarians out of necessity.



When I arrived here, I could buy a very nice meal in an elegant restaurant for about $8.00. Now that same meal costs me $20.00, because of the local price increase and the poor exchange rate. My rent was $1300/month when I arrived, and now it is over $2,000/month for my three bedroom apartment. Poland is one of the poorest countries in Europe. It is much worse here though, because we are getting Western European prices, but still have Eastern European wages. Over 6 million Poles live and work abroad to survive. In this town, many husbands have left their families to work and send money back home.



Life is very hard for the average Pole. It makes me appreciate what I have. Even poor people in the US live better than the average person in Poland. We not only have cheap gas, but almost everything is cheaper in the US.
 
In Europe gas is taxed heavily to subsidize mass transit. But mass transit is more practical for Europe than it is for much of the U.S. and a lot of the folks who run the govt here are from the east coast and don't understand that it ISN'T practical for everyone.



My son is visiting this weekend, he was in Italy a few weeks ago and commented that he saw very few fat people there.
 
Caymen said:
If we had a public transportation as nice as the ones in Germany has, I would park all my vehicles and use it.



Germany is a lot smaller than many US states, isn't it, with a much greater population density then most of the US. So it's no surprise that they, and much of Europe have much better public transportation than the US.



Most US metro areas have very useful, effective public transportion. They work well for people living in the city, and those that take regional transport to get to them. But unless you live and work in, or near such an area, it simply isn't economically viable to build such transportation...the demand is too small.



Cheap gas and the American love affair with the car has fueled our sprawl. We might very well see that sprawl contract, and more public transportation created, but it won't happen overnight.



TJR
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Germany is a lot smaller than many US states, isn't it, with a much greater population density then most of the US. So it's no surprise that they, and much of Europe have much better public transportation than the US.



Coincidently, the population of Germany is less than the US is too. I don't buy your theory.



It could be done. We choose not to.





Tom
 
Caymen said:
Coincidently, the population of Germany is less than the US is too. I don't buy your theory.



It could be done. We choose not to.



We choose not to because it wouldn't be cost effective.



The population being lower in Germany is because, largely, it is so much smaller than the US. Again, it comes down to population density. Population density, I submit, is the #1 factor driving public transportation. In areas of the US with high population density we have public transportation.



The pop density of Germany 234.1 persons/sq km and in the US it is 28.7 persons/sq km (1997 figures). They are almost 10x as packed in with people as we are. That's the reason, right there. For us to be as densly populated would require a population of almost 3 billion people (10x our approx 300 M)...I'm sure when that day comes we will have much more public transportation.



 
Last edited by a moderator:
We choose not to because it wouldn't be cost effective.



In other words, "we can't get rich off of it". I live in a metropolis of about 350,000 people. Our public transportation system is deplorable, to be gentle about it.



It can be done, some of us try to see it in a different light.





Tom
 
I beg to differ:



Public Transit is HORRENDOUS in the metro areas. It doesn't reach most suburbs because the major cities have shown that crime comes down the metro, and no one wants that anywhere near their neighborhood.



Not only is public transit horrendous in crime, but it doesn't go where it needs to go. In Baltimore the government cut the busses that went to the more suburban areas, due to the structure of the city not providing efficient routes for buses to take to get to these areas. That, and ridership was low in those areas. Now gas prices are up, and the mta complains that no one rides the buses, which gets the green freaks up in arms. The people who would now ride the buses due to prices can not, as the nearest bus stop is at their destination!



The train service is horrendous. The Subway only has one line, so there is a large turn around time between east and westbound trains, and the destinations that it serves aren't in demand, and due to vast oversight in development, the subway does not link up with other transit services directly.



The Surface Train, the light rail, oh, there's a lot to be said on this sucker. The train is a good idea, but it only runs longitudinally through the city, which would be fine except that almost every street in B'More runs latitudinally, so the train takes almost 3 hours to go its entire length, one way. Cross street traffic slows the train down so much that just closing traffic on one street would cut times by 40 minutes.



You want to know why no one rides? The services don't go where they are needed, and they are SLOW. You can walk between several in-city stops faster than you can get there by train!





After inefficiency and poor routes, you have Crime. You say the "felony express" of the metros is a myth? Alright, I guess you haven't ridden on one in the DC sprawl. I have, and I'll give you some of my experiences.



For those of you who haven't been to baltimore, the major tourist attraction is Harbor Place, a tourist area built around the famed Inner Harbor of baltimore. Harbor Place was built in the 80s, and shortly after it was built, baltimore was proclaimed the "greatest city in America". You can still see that proclamation proudly engraved on most of the Harbor Place street benches...benches that have since been tagged and broken.



Harbor Place is supposed to be a safe area, and between the occasional aggressive hobo and drunken losers, it appears to be. However, last summer when I boarded the train at the Convention Center, in the heart of this "safe area", there were several black inner city youth boarding the trains. We saw knives in their pockets, but that isn't a really terrible thing--I carry knives as well. The alarming thing was seeing black guys aged 13-30 or so packing heat.

When young teenagers make a point of getting onto the train and lifting their shirts to expose their piece, you begin to wonder how safe it really is.



A white couple was also beaten down by a gang of middle school black kids, though the circumstances that started it are iffy, though the male in the couple said he didn't retaliate because he was afraid of being sued or jailed due to the PC and affirmative action BS that is rampant in the city.



Oh, just FYI, the trains and buses are NOT patrolled. Occasionally a ticket checker comes through, but in riding the train 50 times last summer, I never saw one. And these checkers are unarmed, so the signs say. They aren't police, but "if you are caught in violation of the rules of the train, they will summon the police."



yeah, a lot of good that will do. The white couple had already had the hell beaten out of them before the "popo" could get there.



After incidents such as this, activists who are out of touch with reality STILL think that transit is safe and should be mandated for everyone.<s
 
On the plus side of this, if Hillary R. Clinton becomes president and forces gun control on us, if I ride the buses for a few hours--and don't have to discipline "gangsta" middle schoolers--I'll see a gang shooting or violent mugging, and I'll be able to pick up several illicit firearms from the corpses.



The socialism will undermine itself lol



Public transit even in my area is horrendous. From our state capital to Baltimore is a distance of about 14 miles. Most of my county consists of peninsulas over 10 miles long. I live at the head of one such peninsula. The bus station is 1.147 miles _exactly_ from my house by bicycle. That's the northbound one. To get southbound I have to, on foot, cross the main road of my county, a highly trafficked 4 lane road. Not a hard feat, even at rush hour, but many people have died doing it.



Public transit for me is difficult to access*, but for the 100,000 plus people living on the peninsulas behind me, it is impossible.



Public transit is also very expensive. I went 16 days without refueling. 75 bucks to refuel. It would be over 50 just to ride the buses to get to where I needed to go during those 16 days, plus the time expended to get to and from the multiple bus stops, and the delays of the nasty weather we've had for those 16 days. And I would only need to go a few miles on the bus. Anyone who would have to drive to the station and then ride the bus the entire route into Baltimore--where many people around me work--would be spending more on the bus than on gas, especially if they drive a more fuel-efficient car than the much-beloved Sport Trac, which most do.





(*as walking there with all of my stuff would be a pain, and I have to cross several other major roads just to get there, and biking (as much as I love it) would fail as our buses don't have any way to carry bikes. )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kevin L,



What you describe is more of an inner-city/urban blight and inner-city crime issue. That's unfortunately related to public transportation as you and I have agreed that it is primarily metro areas that have mass trans.



The fact remains that for public transportation to be *NEEDED* and to be *EFFECTIVE* (both in purpose and in cost/benefit) then a rather high population density is required. That means metro areas in our country, reaching out to the suburbs with regional transit if/as needed.



We all remember the LI Railroad shooting. That's a good example of what Kevin is talking about. Some "white folks" in the burbs don't want easy transit from the city to their neighborhoods. Again, that's not a mass transit problem, that's an inner city crime problem...related they are, but different nonetheless.



Public transportation is not effective in the US largely because it isn't needed...meaning there aren't a majority of people demanding it and willing to pay for it. The poor who need it the most don't have a voice, and the rich that have a voice wouldn't use it if it were there due to crime/stigma.



Yes, public transportation in the US is horrendous...but you get what you pay for, and we pay for what we value and need.



TJR
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And how many employers are flexible enough to allow workers to use mass transit (i.e. leave work before the last train or bus) or carpool? Not many where I live.
 
I don't know many people out here in the rural suburbs who would surrender the freedom of driving to the constraints of getting picked up by a bus. They complain about rush hour traffic, and how they just sit and crawl at 5 mph average speed, but when it comes to giving that up for a bus, they rile up against it, and defend the driving that they were just against.



Public transit might not be so crime-ridden if it had protection, but we really can't have protection in this day and age, so what if instead the only way to ride buses down to certain areas where there are only residences, say the multiple peninsulas of my county, would be to actually live down there? Maybe that goes against the ideas of "public", but it could be a solution.



We can't "protect" public transit as the private citizen can't fight back without being ok with a 5+ year jail sentence, and we don't have enough police to enforce the system. The idealists say we shouldn't need cops, and protest spending, and the cops that we do get are becoming more and more of a lesser caliber. I know a few guys going into the police academy, and my county will only give them half pay while they are in the academy, so they have decided to bail to another county which pays full in the academy. I realize that money is important, but making decisions as a cop based on money for training is like taking a bribe before you even get the badge; doesn't bode well in my mind. Who becomes a cop for the money after all?



**per capita, I live in the "wealthiest" state in the nation. These guys are deserting the 5th wealthiest county in my state for the 1st :(



Sadly, these guys are, except for this money business that I disagree with, are pretty decent guys, and they're bailing on our county, leaving only the dregs of society cops making up the majority of the police force. A bunch of loser guys becoming cops for the wrong reasons are supposed to protect us here from thugs from the cities? I don't like those odds.





Even if it doesn't spread crime, it would spread people, and turn pastoral areas into extensions of the city, which has happened here :(



Once I am in the city though, I don't want to drive. If the intra-city transit could be improved and some reliable transit routes to get to the city could be created, there would be progress...park n ride lots here are used for road construction storage as no commuters use them, and for good reason.



As for employers, UPS had a majority of its workers come in by public transit--they had a bus stop right at the guard station--and they posted notes saying "if the bus is late, it is your responsibility", and if you had to work late, well then, you were just going to have to wait the extra hour or so--unpaid--on the stop seat as you wait for the crappy bus to get there, assuming that it ever would.

 
Kevin L, you raise even more reasons why public transportation in the US is largely a metro entity used mostly by poorer people. Those that HAVE to use it do so; those that don't have to don't use it. I'm sure if more rich folk HAD to use it then it would be improved, safer and more widespread.



TJR
 
It'd be nice if we had safer and more widespread public transit--by that I mean trains as buses can never truly loose their stigma to me from experiences that were less than ideal, but at the same time that will just expand the cities outward, and I'm against that. Bedroom communities suck...being against them is one reason that our current governor was elected, but of course, he has reniged on that promise and is now encouraging it to get himself more money; just another shining beacon of hope in the democratic party.



In light of the ghetto/bedroom spread historical evidence, I'm siding with the plan to just improve intra-city public transit. I personally don't want to drive in the city, but I can get there without problem, and there are park and ride lots around here, as well as relatively close commuter trains. Only the park n ride lots directly near me are unused, ones further away really pack in the people.



Forget spreading it out to the masses until we can manage it inside the cities.
 
I guess I'm lucky. I have a mass transit stop right in front of my office and it runs regular times and is generally on time.



I do have to drive an extra 10 miles to get on it every day, but hey, it's mass transit right?:D
 
Kevin L, you raise even more reasons why public transportation in the US is largely a metro entity used mostly by poorer people. Those that HAVE to use it do so; those that don't have to don't use it. I'm sure if more rich folk HAD to use it then it would be improved, safer and more widespread.



If the "Rich Folk" had a reliable and safe mass transit system, they would use it.



It is not about having to use something.



"Build it and they will come".





Tom
 

Latest posts

Top