I think your wrong. When we start to go to alternative energy they will drop the price back to 50-60 bucks a barrel to stop all interest in alternative fuels and then when jeb bush gets back in we will go through this once again.

OK lets get one thing straight. NO ONE with an ounce of REAL knowledge on this subject ACTUALLY believes Gas Prices (overall) have ANYTHING at all to do with Supply and Demand.

Supply and Demand infer that the supply and the demand are not “altered” artificially and with intent.

For example intentionally witholding supply so that you insure that demand will exceed supply is “controlling” the price. In many fields this is actually illegal.

It is a known fact it is not even HIDDEN that OPEC affiliates have a contractual agreement LIMITING there production of gasoline on purpose so that THEY and NOT supply and demand can dictate the price of gasoline. It has absolutely nothing to do with Supply and Demand.

The cost of gas this week verse NEXT week has something to do with supply and demand. The cost of gas today and last year has pretty much nothing to do with supply and demand in any way shape or form.

In fact when an OPEC affiliate starts pumping out MORE gas to increase revenue they are fined and or punished by the others for breaching the agreement to restrict gasoline flow.

This is not conspiracy people this is common knowledge.

Anyone who thinks $2.80+ a gallon has ANYTHING to do with supply and demand is deluding themselves or simply utterly uneducated in the subject matter.

They control the price of gasoline DIRECTLY and the auto industry literally refuses to make an alternative to sell us because the alternatives are longer lasting and lower maintenance therfore not as profitable. This was an active intentional decision on the part of auto makers. It is precisely why we do not have an EV car for which the technology has been mature and ready for consumer road use for almost 14 years.

The few they made were intentionally crushed and all knowledge was buried to REMOVE the very concept from the mindset of the american public. this was an intentional decision. They refused to sell a single car because they KNEW for an absolute fact that if this technology became not only publicly known but also TOUCHABLE and EXPERIENCABLE by the general populace that the people of this nation would DEMAND IT and would not take no for an answer. We do not demand it because it is not know to us (general public) Most people really think its just too expensive and not good enough or not enough range blah blah blah.

If they could get nearly 200 mile ranges 14 years ago JUST IMAGINE what kind of ranges we would have TODAY if this technology was released and IN consumer hands and COMPETING for the last 14 years. Just think about that for a moment.

If it was already good enough cheap enough effecient enough 14 years ago JUST IMAGINE where it would be today if it was being updated actively every year.

I am pretty damned confident we would have 600+ mile range EV’s for under 10k today if it have been allowed to progress and evolve from 14 years ago.

All the research and technology is DONE. no more R&D dollars to spend to “get it on the road” its done already. All these small companies have to blow massive research dollars to ATTEMPT to cover the footsteps GM has already covered and refuses to even acknowledge. The FEW (2 or 3 IIRC) that were given to museums have the key technologies REMOVED or DESTROYED to insure no one can easily replicate what they have done.

This was all very malicious thoughtout and intentionally done. They wanted the very idea of a practical EV eliminated from the possible mindset of the people because to them this is fatally dangerous information. It will dramatically reduce there “profits” and by a LOT.

Billaind;
Tell this to Nancy and Harry. I’m here for solutions, not left wing fingerpointing.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz…

Yes Dave; we are keenly aware that tree huggers need to wake up.