How to Afford Gasoline in 2012

Page 1 of 2  
If you're having trouble paying the cost of gasoline in 2012, there is a workable solution.
As you're aware, the government and others keep telling you that you need to tune up your car, make sure your tires are inflated properly, and change your oil. These are all excellent tips, but some cars just dont get the best mileage. Of course the government also suggests getting a energy efficient car. Well, I'd be happy to do that, but first they will have to send me a check to cover the cost of buying one. Until that happens (which will be the same day that pigs fly), I'll have to drive my older car that is not the most efficient.
This has lead me to devise a program to be able to afford the gas. I found one that works.
1. EATING Rather than eating 3 meals a day, cut back to 3 meals a week. Eat at your regular dinner hour on Sunday, Wednesday, and Friday. To save even more money, cut your regular portion in half. And be sure to cut out all snacking and alcoholic beverages.
2. BATHING Americans have always been obcessed with cleanliness, but they have been over doing it. Rather than taking a bath or shower daily, cut back to one bath or shower per week. This will save on your water bill and gas or electric bill for your water heating.
3. LAUNDRY Laundering is over rated. You dont need to change your clothing daily. Wear the same clothing for at least two weeks before changing, and always wait until you have a full load before operating a washing machine.
4. HEATING - COOLING - COOKING Home heating and cooling is comfortable, but unnecessary. Shut off your furnace, air conditioning, and other heating/cooling devices. While you're at it, unplug your refrigerator and freezer, and stop cooking your food. All these things consume energy. You can store and eat food at room temperature, and most foods do not need to be cooked.
5. RENT - MORTGAGE Rent and/or mortgages are some of your largest monthly expenses. You could probably fill your entire auto gas tank with what you pay to have a roof over your head. Why are you paying that, when you already have a roof on your car. Simply move out of your home and move into your car. You'll still have a roof over your head, and you'll save a lot of money for home rental or mortgage.
6. ENTERTAINMENT Simply put, you dont need entertainment. Eliminate it entirely.
7. PHONE - TV - INTERNET While you might think you can not live without your cell or home phone, you dont need it. None of your phone calls are important. In earlier centuries, people did not have phones or internet, or even tv. You dont need these things. Just keep a cellphone without service. You can still dial 911 from them, which is all you need. Get rid of all electronics.
8. MEDICAL CARE Most doctor visits are unnecessary. Unless you're on your death bed, you dont need a doctor. Learn to apply bandages and prescribe medicines for yourself. Only go to doctors when you're dying or very severely injured.
Do these things, and you should be able to afford gas for your car. Just remember, you're paying higher prices, but the poor guys from the oil companies are hungry and lack other necessities in life. They badly need your money. You need to help them. By doing the things (above), you will be able to buy more fuel, and in the process, you'll be doing a good deed for the oil company executives and employees.
Gas prices will likely continue to rise in the future. Dont be surprised when it hits $25 a gallon in the near future. In order to continue driving, you'll have to make more cut-backs in life. If you can think of other cut-backs, add them to this list. By the year 2014, over 90% of your earnings will be going to the oil companies. You need to prepare now. The oil companies are depending on it and on you. Don't let them down!!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/28/2012 5:16 AM, snipped-for-privacy@toyotamail.com wrote:

Yes, that's the spirit! If each and every one of us sacrifices just a little bit, the people at the top can live really well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@toyotamail.com wrote:

How about not buying an iSlave device everytime a new model comes out?
How about not buying an iPad or tablet in the first place - since you know it's just a toy that you'll end up putting to trivial use.
How about not paying for your kid to have a cell phone? How about not having kids in the first place? (now there's your real money pit right there).
How about not having a cell phone yourself? I don't own one, and I get along just fine, and keep an extra $50 to $100 a month in my pocket.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It's a fantastic business model the more of our products you own, the more likely you are to buy more,
This is why americans can't afford to buy gasoline.
Because you also have to factor in the cost-of-ownership of these devices (wireless data or cell-phone service plans).
Red Green wrote:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/46857053
Apples Are Growing in American Homes Published: Wednesday, 28 Mar 2012 | 7:27 AM ET
Half of all U.S. households own at least one Apple product, according to CNBCs All-America Economic survey.
Thats more than 55 million homes with at least one iPhone, iPad, iPod or Mac computer. And one-in-10 homes that arent currently in that group plan to join it in the next year.
But Apple doesnt have to worry about brand saturation any time soon. Americans dont stop with just one device. Homes that own least one Apple, own an average of three. Overall, the average household has 1.6 Apple devices, with almost one-quarter planning to buy at least one more in the next year.
It's a fantastic business model the more of our products you own, the more likely you are to buy more, says Jay Campbell, a vice president of Hart Research Associates, which conducts the CNBC survey along with Bill McInturff. Planned obsolescence has always been a part of the technology industries sales model, but Apple has taken it to a whole new level.
Our survey shows Apple buyers tend to be male, college-educated, and younger. Theyre just as likely to own a home as not. Not surprisingly, the more money you earn, the more Apple products youre likely to own.
Just 28 percent of those making less than $30,000 a year own at least one, compared with 77 percent of those making more than $75,000. Those on the higher end of the income scale own an average of about three Apple devices, compared with 0.6 for lower-income homes.
While growing up in the tech age makes a difference, the age gap isnt as wide as you might think. In fact just as many Americans between ages 18 and 34 count themselves among Apple users, as those ages 35-to-49 (63 percent). The number drops to 50 percent when you get into the 50-to-64 age group, and down to just 26 percent among those 65 and older.
It seems parents either want their kids to keep up with technology, or theyre trying to keep them busy. Sixty-one percent of households with children own Apple devices, compared with 48 percent of homes without kids.
The gadgets have found their way into 57 percent of homes in the West, home of Silicon Valley, compared with 47 percent-51 percent in the rest of the country. Two Apple products are in the average home in the American West, compared with just 1.2 in the South, where people own the fewest devices.
Our survey also revealed the desirability of owning an Apple product appears to be something Republicans and Democrats can actually agree on. About 56 percent of the members of each party have at least one, although a gap could soon open. Twenty-six percent of Democrats plan to buy an Apple product in the next 12 months, versus 19 percent of Republicans.
The poll of 836 Americans was conducted by landline and cellphone from March 19 to 22 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percent.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@toyotamail.com wrote:

    God I love the smell of "Hope and Change in the morning."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

In his campaign, Obama promised us CHANGE!
He kept his word. Since he became president, all I have is CHANGE in my pockets.
Lets see, right now I have two quarters, five dimes, three nickles, and 17 pennies. This means my life's savings is $1.32. That should buy enough gas to exit the parking lot at the gas station, or a small order of fries at McDonalds. I'd prefer the fries, but I suppose I better buy the gas so I can move the car to a different parking spot, or it will cost $375 to get my car out of impound for violating the parking restrictions.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I bought a good gas mileage car 5 years ago for $1000 when gas prices were starting to rise the first time around.
If you have purchased a low gas mileage car since then, well who is to blame for that?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Obama, he's the one who is blocking the drilling permits, and shutting down the oil production off the coasts. http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Obama-blocks-oil-drilling-3438707.php The CT post has a good perspective.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
I bought a good gas mileage car 5 years ago for $1000 when gas prices were starting to rise the first time around.
If you have purchased a low gas mileage car since then, well who is to blame for that?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Looks like your aberrant top posting isn't the only indication that you don't mind looking like an idiot on the internet. Why don't you learn something instead of repeating crap:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_offshore_drilling_debate
The bottom line is that we're drilling more than ever, imports as a percentage of consumption are dropping. Exactly what we _all_ want to happen. But you'll complain simply because the president isn't John McCain.
Personally, I see zero logic in this mad rush to squeeze every last drop of oil out of the Earth.
--
Dan Espen

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
http://hastings.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID (4261 While domestic oil production has increased dramatically on state and private lands, in 2011 oil production on federal lands and offshore, where President Obama's restrictive policies have the most impact, decreased by double digits compared to 2010. The Obama Administration has closed off the vast majority our offshore areas to energy production, granted fewer approvals of oil leases and permits on federal land, and killed the Keystone XL pipeline that would have created over ten thousand jobs.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
The bottom line is that we're drilling more than ever, imports as a percentage of consumption are dropping.
--
Dan Espen



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

down
http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/Obama-blocks-oil-drilling-3438707.php
It's not an article, it's a letter to the editor. Any kook can write one. Like that one did. Or perhaps you support this other "CT good perspective."
http://www.ctpost.com/news/article/A-guarantee-of-health-care-coverage-for-all-3445238.php
Besides, the federal lands hold oil that belong to every US citizen. Obama won the general election therefore he gets to decide issues like this. That's what happens in a democracy. Clearly you don't like how democracies work so why not find a country more to your liking? You seem to have quickly (conveniently?)forgotten about Big Oil stepping on its Big D!ck and polluting the coasts of a number of states.
Big Oil lied when it said it had "blow out" preventers that actually worked. Now they're paying for lying by the Feds not believing them without investigating thoroughly. As they should. Or are you against people taking responsibility for their own actions? I don't want to have to swim in Big Oil's black lies. They did the crime, now they do the time.
Besides, having oil reserves is like having money in the bank. I find it odd to hear Republicans demand we cut back on spending "for future generations" but seem happy to leave our descendants bereft of oil. Germany and Japan lost WWII in large part because they ran out of oil. That's an important lesson, but one some people choose to ignore. If another WW breaks out, you can forget about transoceanic oil shipments. We would go to war mostly with the oil we've got in the ground and in storage. Would you sell out the future security of America to save 25 cents a gallon on gas? Not me.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Looks like Obama is getting ready to do exactly that if he and the Euros really decide to open up the spigots on the Strategic Oil Reserve.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
After years of observing how he "runs the country", I've concluded. The foreign born America hating marxist doesn't have the nation's best interest at heart.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
Looks like Obama is getting ready to do exactly that if he and the Euros really decide to open up the spigots on the Strategic Oil Reserve.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
fact-free post

interest
Stormie, where did you go to school? You're entitled to a refund. There are plenty of people without high school degrees in AHR that can (and do) write rings around you. Why should anyone consider your mostly fact-free political observations would be any more accurate than your command of written English?
First line: Grammar - Sentence fragment, improper punctuation. "I've concluded" should NOT be followed by a period. Your fragment makes no sense as it stands. The correct form is "After X, I concluded Y." Your "Y" is missing from the first sentence fragment. (1)
First line: Grammar - The comma should be inside the quotes but more importantly, the use of quotes suggests he's actually not running the country. In any event the meaning of your "scare" quote is unclear. Is he really running the country? Is he running it badly? Is he running it as a dictator might? As one of the citations below says, "just say what you mean!" (2) (3)
Second line: Grammar - "foreign born" and "America hating" should be hyphenated. (4) "Best interest?" The US has only one? (-: Using the plural form would be better in this instance, but you won't get marked down for it. At three mistakes per sentence-like structure, there's no point in piling on.
Second line: Content - Untrue by inspection unless you personally saw his birth out of country or know someone personally who did. Otherwise you're bearing false witness and violating a commandment held sacred by both Christians and Jews. Ignoring one of the Ten Commandments tends to support the frequent conjecture that Mormons really aren't Christians and they don't share fundamental Christian beliefs. I kinda thought they did until I read this article:
http://www.jesus.org/is-jesus-god/who-is-jesus/are-mormons-christian.html
<<Mormonism rejects Christian orthodoxy as the very argument for its own existence, and it clearly identifies historic Christianity as a false faith>>
Second line: Grammar - "foreign born America hating marxist" should be set off by commas as in "foreign-born, America-hating Marxist" (5)
Second line: Grammar - "marxist" should be capitalized. (6)
Second line: Content - Can you list some of the actions he's taken that qualify him as a Marxist that previous Republican presidents did NOT also engage in? Can you point to specific citations that show Obama hates America? Based on how well your educators taught you to write, I'm not sure your history teachers did any better in teaching you about the various political systems of the world. Do you have a heart and mind scanner? Is that how you were able to tell what's in Obama's heart? (-:
Citations:
(1) http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Usage/Usage86.html says <<A sentence fragment can have a subject and predicate, but it's a fragment if it's dependent on another clause.>>
(2) http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Punctuation/Punctuation63.html says <<the period or comma goes inside both single and double quotation marks>>
(3) http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/CMS_FAQ/Punctuation/Punctuation60.html says << Excessive use of scare quotes imparts a jittery feel to writing and gives the impression that the writer isn't skilled at conveying precise meanings.>>
(4) http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hyphenated says <<foreign-born citizens of the United States>>
(5) http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/commas_in_lists.htm says <<When there are more than two items in a list, they should be separated using commas.>>
(6) http://newsroom.depaul.edu/facultyresources/styleguide/index.html says <<Capitalize words derived from proper nouns: Chicagoan, Christian, Marxist.

-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Stormin Mormon wrote:

I heard Lawrence J. Peter (discoverer of the "Peter Principle") observe: "I've been following governments, man and boy, for over forty years. I have yet to conclude whether we are being led by well-meaning fools or by really smart people who are just putting us on."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Maybe that's why O keeps community organizing? it was the last position where he had competence?
I thought it was J. Lawrence Peter? Maybe my CRS is acting up. Or maybe my RCS?
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
Stormin Mormon wrote:

I heard Lawrence J. Peter (discoverer of the "Peter Principle") observe: "I've been following governments, man and boy, for over forty years. I have yet to conclude whether we are being led by well-meaning fools or by really smart people who are just putting us on."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

go to

you
gas?
You know he's got no choice. How else can he respond to the "Blame Obama for Voracious Worldwide Competition and an Enormous Growth in Oil Speculation" game? That's the latest "the sky is falling" ploy that is being run by a certain party with eyes on the Whitehouse. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve can be replenished once the manufactured hysteria has died down, the Iran/Syria crisis cooled off and the election is over. The SPR has been put into play many, many times in the past.
It's not necessarily statistically valid to compare the 727 million barrels in the SPR to the estimate 20+ billion barrels of proven reserves. They are very different forms of liquidity. (-: The SPR has been tapped quite a few times since it was started. But it's much harder to jam that oil back into the ground than it is to replenish the SPR, often in lieu of royalty payments. I don't see this as a danger, just a forced temporary setback. I do see a danger in "drill, baby, drill." I see hypocrisy in claims we can't saddle our kids with a huge deficit (which we could literally print our way out of) while the question about leaving them short of oil (which no printing press can remedy) goes largely unnoticed.
From what I've heard about the SPR, a good-look see is very much in order from time to time. What better way to judge its capabilities than a sell-off? Some people believe it's filled with a substantial amount of "junk oil." That's oil that has been seriously contaminated in some way and sold into the reserve where discovery of the fraud could take years and prosecution forever. I suspect - no, fear - the SPR has been as well-inspected as the blowout preventers on BP's deepsea rig were. We know how that ended. You can't trust government OR big business to self-regulate in situations like this.
As you're well aware, oil prices fluctuate based on rumors, predictions, world events, etc. Merely threatening to tap the reserves seems to have had an effect on speculators who could get badly trashed by such a move. Besides, according to the laws that created the Reserve the President can open them if he deems
(A) an emergency situation exists and there is a significant reduction in supply which is of significant scope and duration; (B) a severe increase in the price of petroleum products has resulted from such emergency situation; and
(C) such price increase is likely to cause a major adverse impact on the national economy.
The current situation in Iran and Syria seem to qualify for a release.
With the Republicans trying to make gas prices into yet another "Look at what Obama did NOW" issue, I don't see he has a lot of choice. If the release is effective, it means yet another attack vector for November gets closed off. This falls under the computer science saying: "A backup isn't really a backup until you've proved you can restore it."
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/spr/History_of_Releases_-_Summary1.pdf
You can examine the list of releases and see that this isn't the first release. Historically, the price of gas will be reduced, but only temporarily. Probably just enough to guarantee that gas prices are not the issue Mitt and Rick hope they're going to be in November 2012.
Have you been following some of the latest economic studies? They're beginning to put the lie to the Laffer curve and suggest that the Bush tax cuts are what put us in the current economic crisis. Some even say that raising the tax rates for the very wealthy to pre-cut levels *and* closing a number of loopholes would reduce the deficit substantially.
--
Bobby G.









Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
o open up the spigots on the Strategic Oil Reserve.

And I have consistently argued against it. Political expediency by any party is bad. Getting the president re-elected is NOT a strategic necessity.

What significant reduction in supply? It is pretty well established that the embargoes are leaking like a sieve and that the Saudis have done their bit to up production. There is the usual alternating between drawdowns and builds.

That is yet another reason to not hit it. Re-election of a president doesn't qualify as an emergency, especially if it is only temporary and only serves to kick cans further down the street.

There are others that disagree. Selective perception is very much a two-way street. (g).
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Obama
died
SPR
Republicans presidential candidates started this by blaming the President for the rise in gas prices. How on earth is someone supposed to counter charges that the president should fire three of his cabinet members for failing to get oil prices down or Newt's boast that he can get gas back down to $2.50 a gallon? There are consequences for lying and for trying to score political points. I don't like it much, either, but for reasons stated elsewhere, it doesn't bother me nearly as much as the urge to pump North Slope oil.
Obviously some people (Stormy, for one) believe these claims that it's the President's policy that's keeping gas above $2.50 a gallon. They seem to believe "If only we had an oil-friendly President like Bush, we could have cheap oil!" They are not living in reality. Just after Bush took office, gas was $1.45 a gallon. By June 2008, that price had spiked to over $4 a gallon. Yet some people still think "If only presidents were friendlier to Big Oil" we would have cheap gasoline.
Is the release naked political expediency? Probably. The true solution is to focus on the many things Obama has done that he's actually responsible for and not make insane claims. The law, however, lets the release happen because there's a "paper" slowdown. It's just like how the law allows the POTUS to fire all US Attorneys. Neither side ever seems terribly interested in changing such laws because they like them so much when they're in power.

in
from
There's at least a significant reduction in the supply of truth, for one. No one seems to realize that we consume far more oil than we have. We burn 20 percent of the world's oil but own only 2 percent of the oil reserves. That's the equation that drives the whole train. We could ramp up production, pump every drop we have and it's still not enough. By a longshot. Yet people believe that we've got all we need for centuries just out of reach. That's why I'd support a citizenship test for voting.
We depend on the world market because we have far less oil than we consume. We'll always be customers, not suppliers in the global scheme of things. The rush to get at ANWR is political. The Republicans want to drill there because someone told them they can't. They've conned a lot of Americans into thinking that there's enough oil there to change the whole equation and end our dependence on foreign oil. That's just not true. Unless we become incredibly more efficient, it will *never* be true.
The actual contribution of ANWR opened to the hilt isn't enough to move gas but a few cents downward for a little while. Its true value is in a world crisis where ocean oil shipments cease. THAT'S when we'll be very, very thankful that we have our own sources of oil. Some countries wouldn't be so lucky.
It should be a no-brainer to realize that if we depend THAT MUCH on foreign oil (and that can only change through conservation, not "drill, baby, drill") we had better make sure we can survive for a while without it. ANWR is our "nuclear rainy day" fund yet some people want to burn through it like crack addicts looking for their next fix. All to save from 5 or 10 cents on a gallon of gas.

the
Are you trying to tell us Republican presidents haven't released oil at suspiciously timed points? (-: If a release's only value is to trip up some speculators and drive them out of the market, well, then I am all for it. Oil is now grossly over-speculated. Perhaps the Bush tax cut freeing up so much cash for speculators has something to do with rising oil prices.

tax
closing a

I guess we'll have to get into it. (-" There's a difference between basing tax policy on "back of the napkin" sketches and actual research. It seems that due to tax law quirks, researchers can now examine what happens under different tax schemes for the same classes of filers.
I'm beginning to think that slogan "if you tax the rich it will hurt everyone" is basically the biggest PR con job in world history. This country was in far, far better shape economically when the taxes on the rich were incredibly much higher than current levels. Apparently, if you leave them too much money, they RUIN it for everyone else by vastly increasing speculative activities that cause prices to skyrocket in housing, oil and food. (-"
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

That's not exactly the case. Proven oil reserves total about 21 billion barrels. The Dept of the Interior estimates undiscovered, but available, reserves at 134 billion barrels. The Bureau of Land Management estimates there are 2 TRILLION bbls of potentially recoverable oil.
True, we use 20% of the world's oil, but we account for 25% of the world's GDP.

No. We import because we do not PRODUCE enough oil, not that we don't have it.

Agree. Oil is fungible, that is, one barrel of oil is pretty much like any other barrel of oil.

Not so. More oil produced domestically means a lower world-wide price for oil. The more oil we burn now, the sooner we'll find a proper substitute. That is, technology is dependent on oil; to cut back - to conserve - simultaneously means a cut-back on science and technology.

Arrant nonsense. What do you think the rich DO with their wealth? Stuff it in a mattress? No, they invest it and, in so doing, create jobs. Or they buy things. For example:
You may recall the 10% tax surcharge the Clinton administration levied on yachts costing more than $500,000. The result? The rich simply started buying their boats in the Bahamas. Dozens of yacht builders went out of business causing hundreds of workers their jobs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.