The pros and cons of the auto bailout and concerns about the rising price of gasoline have been a political football throughout this election season. So, it should come as no surprise that the auto industry was brought up more than a few times in last night's heated presidential debate.

Roughly a minute into the debate, the subject was raised by President Obama when asked a question about unemployment. The President's answer: "I want to build manufacturing jobs in this country again. Now when Gov. Romney said we should let Detroit go bankrupt, I said we're going to bet on American workers and the American auto industry and it's coming back."

Romney countered by pointing out that Obama followed the Governor's advice offered in his New York Times editorial "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" from 2008. Romney stated that the President did, in fact, let Chrysler go bankrupt, and pointed out, "My plan was to have the company go through bankruptcy... and come out stronger." Obama retorted that Romney's view of taking the automakers into bankruptcy did not provide them with any way to stay open, and would have lost a million jobs in the process.

The candidates also spoke on energy and oil production, primarily in response to questions of recently spiking gas prices. The President pointed out that oil production on federal land is at its highest in 16 years and natural gas production is at its highest levels in decades. Romney responded by saying that overall oil production is down 14 percent as a result of cutting licenses for drilling. Additionally, Romney criticized Obama for blockage of the Keystone oil pipeline.

Surprisingly, yesterday's bankruptcy filing of A123 Systems was not brought up, though Republicans, including Romney, have criticized the Obama administration's investment in electric cars as well as grants and loans for battery makers. If Tuesday's Chapter 11 filing was not mentioned last night, it will most certainly come up in the days and weeks to come.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 195 Comments
      Myself
      • 2 Years Ago
      Seriously, if my country was run by a guy like Romney, I'd be ashamed.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        • 2 Years Ago
        [blocked]
      yahoo_user
      • 2 Years Ago
      I didn't realize how most autoblog readers are still drinking the Os' Kool-Aid and believing his lies. I assume most are under 30 and live in blue states?
        Spec
        • 2 Years Ago
        @yahoo_user
        I don't think that is a good line of attack for you considering that Romney got humiliated on national TV for pushing a lie about Obama allegedly not calling the Libya attack an 'act of terror'.
          John R
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          You obivously haven't heard that after the debate, on tape, Crowley said Romney was correct and 0bama lied.
          FreeThinker
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          Spec is correct here. Quote from Sept. 12th speech at the White House Rose Garden: "Indeed, Obama declared on Sept. 12 that “no acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” Romney put his foot in it, but I think he really believed he was right because even he's been spoon-fed nothing but Faux News Channel fear propoganda by his staff. And why let the truth get in the way of a good public scare? /sarcasm
        A_Guy
        • 2 Years Ago
        @yahoo_user
        I'm 30, live in Texas, have an ATV, a lifted truck, and (whacky part) am a graphic artist and have a hybrid commuter. I've never touched any government welfare as I've always worked for EVERYTHING. I will never touch welfare, but I understand some people need it. Even some 'conservatives' I know. I support Obama.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          [blocked]
          over9000
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          Now a part of your hardwork go into social security checks, which goes to fund alcoholism, weed, and cigs to lazy azz losers in Main St.
          Carma Racing
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          The only useful democrats I know are exactly like you and have high tech work that isolates them from the reality of brick and mortar businesses, but I bet if you start your own company with employees and deal with the government rules and taxes, you will come around. Think of how much more good your tax money could do if it were not diluted by endless bureaucracy. It could actually go to those that need it rather than paying for government employees and stupid stuff that has nothing to do with helping anybody.
          A_Guy
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          @Carma: It is at least good to hear a sensible response, even if it I don't agree with it. I have owned two companies to my name. They were not big but were profitable (one I sold) the other is still running on it's own (software). It is true, I have worked in tech jobs since before finishing college, and considered myself a conservative at the time, not because of anything except for ignorance. Looking back, I was full of a lot of hate and discrimination. Financially, I am still very conservative with my money, but I understand new technologies, roads, education, and so much more need nurturing. Some people simply need help. I am perfectly willing to pay it forward to the country that set forth the ability for me to be successful. I also strongly believe the rich do not need tax cuts. They do not pass it on to the workforce, they keep it and find ways to keep trimming the company. This is fact, but of course there are exceptions. And, that's ok, but they can do that just fine by paying the same tax rate as me.
          A_Guy
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          @over9000: Get real, you sound like an old man. WhichI have a hard time believing considering your username is from DBZ. In my experience in the workplace, smoking and drinking have very little to do with a person's financial success. Like anything, even something as 'innocent' as religion, can drag you to the bottom if you aren't careful. I am a very reasonable person with the only major things that make me lean left are 1.) green energy and 2.) no tax breaks for rich. I don't think there is any system in the world that will stop leechers. There are ways to punish, but it will just make different problems. I don't like it either, but don't act like your candidate of choice will make the slightest difference in that problem, because it won't.
        Carma Racing
        • 2 Years Ago
        @yahoo_user
        Yes. The young people have not yet learned how things work and have swallowed the crap from their schools, the media and the wise Hollywood crowd. I have hope because I too was a dumbocrat in HS and college. Let em try start a business and deal with the reality of the government and the market. Most will learn.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        throwback
        • 2 Years Ago
        I'm not an Obama fan but I don't think any president would have sat by and watched 2 million people go out of work, which is what would have happened if GM and Chrysler went into liquidation. There was zero money for restructuring so their assets would have been sold off. Imagine trying to campaign in Michigan, ohio, Indiana, etc when you sat by and watched those jobs go.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @throwback
          [blocked]
          • 2 Years Ago
          @throwback
          [blocked]
          nsxrules
          • 2 Years Ago
          @throwback
          As far as Bain, I see you clearly don't understand business. If a company has 20K employees and is in the verge of collapse it is better to restructure and layoff some employees, say 2000 than to do nothing and have the company go under and have 20K people lose their jobs. Bain has created more net jobs than Obama (there are less people working today than when he took office).
          EVSUPERHERO
          • 2 Years Ago
          @throwback
          Every one is pumped to have a business man in the White House. Seems like all those bankers and car corps were business men that got bailed out. The bankers excuse was, "my company is so big how am I suppose to know what is going on". Imagine how a business man would be with a large government. We have little use for Romney s talents of bankrupting business for profit. According to Romney it is more than fair that he pays 13% on millions in profit because he will provide jobs. I provided jobs with my small business grossing less than 100k dollars but I have to pay 30% on profits because I can't afford Romney' s lawyers. In my business I actually worked with my arms and back, and when you do this you must be taxed at the 30% than 13% because it is physical back breaking labor, because it is hard labor you must pay more in tax. Why people will clamor to vote for Romney to keep themselves enslaved to elitists like this, I will never know. Romney's belief is, the only way the middle class will get wealthier and larger is if the rich get richer. Romney has all the answers in his head but will put very little on paper to be scrutinized. So much easier to make stuff up on the fly. The ignorant Americans will believe because they are ignorant and lazy and wish to vote for presidents like they are voting for American Idol. As DF would say, "my what a world".
        MAX
        • 2 Years Ago
        Right now American oil companies are exporting gasoline and are talking about exporting crude oil! http://www.forexpros.com/analysis/oil-and-gas-industry-pushing-u.s.-exports-139764
          • 2 Years Ago
          @MAX
          [blocked]
          Spec
          • 2 Years Ago
          @MAX
          We still import nearly half our crude oil but domestic production has increased massively. And we have excess refining capacity such that we export a lot of refined product to South & Central America these days.
        leo
        • 2 Years Ago
        yeah the #of leases in federal land went down,...that's because the oil companies are not using what they already have....no matter how you look at it, what Romney said was deviant and not the full picture... to make this about cars, look at the new Fusion hybrid, 47mpg and i can easily cut my gas bill in less than half if I were to switch from my G35 to it....but i only have a 10mi round trip to work so i'm willing to pay. there are tons of people that drive around in a Suburban that complain gas prices are too high and they never use the car as intended..solution, buy a car that fits your needs not your wants, otherwise stop complaining
          Spec
          • 2 Years Ago
          @leo
          And the oil companies have this idea of drilling where the oil is. Right now the big play is the North Dakota Bakken shale and that is all private land. So that is where they are drilling.
        Spec
        • 2 Years Ago
        Domestic Oil production has increased more during the Obama administration than at any time in the last 30 years! I know that facts have a trouble penetrating the conservative bubble. That's why Romney ended up being HUMILIATED ON NATIONAL TELEVISION when he tried to push the conservative conspiracy theory about Obama never saying 'Act of Terror'. If you don't deal in facts then you can't make good policy or lead.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        Rob J
        • 2 Years Ago
        There is no free speech on the internet. If Republicans had their way, there would be even less.
        Grendal
        • 2 Years Ago
        I just read that comment. It's still there with the three replies it had. Currently it's got a -12 rating. It was the very first comment on this thread. So no conspiracy or propoganda. Unless there was another comment that got deleted. If so, then they are out to get you. ;-)
          Spec
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Grendal
          LOL. I just wrote a rant about how everything on the right is a conspiracy theory . . . and this clown instantly proves my point by conjuring up another conspiracy theory on the spot!
        • 2 Years Ago
        [blocked]
          Grendal
          • 2 Years Ago
          Of course they are. You know too much. Run.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        RGT881
        • 2 Years Ago
        Nicely summed up. And of course people who will vote you down are pro-union, Obama and GM fanboys. Bailout was a wrong thing to do at least for GM, Chrysler somehow managed to stay away from moral hazard, same thing cannot be said for GM. I think every financial analyst cracks up when they see GMs financial statements
          ilmhmtu
          • 2 Years Ago
          @RGT881
          People can have differing opinions and not be a "fanboy." This is more of a general statement than directed at you specificially. The term fanboy in any post should result in automatic thumb-down. It adds nothing to the conversation.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @RGT881
          [blocked]
        wrestleprocbt
        • 2 Years Ago
        This is very well put! The only ones that benefitted were the union thugs. I know of two suppliers in my town that had to close because they were owed large amounts of money by GM and were not paid. Where is our money Government Motors? Hey, how about that new electric Cady? Looks nice, hope it sells better than that Volt we are all paying for too!
        jtav2002
        • 2 Years Ago
        A lot of reading, not a lot of fact. The only thing that matters is the plan that Romney wanted to carryout for the auto industry would have undoubtedly lead to Chrysler and GM no longer being in existence anymore. EVERY bi-partisan analysis says that. Without the bailout money, they would have had nothing to give to creditors and would have had to sell off assets. They needed the money just to stay afloat to even enter into the bankruptcy restructuring process. Perhaps you need to inform yourself a little more on the whole bankruptcy process.
        Spec
        • 2 Years Ago
        Why is everything on the right a conspiracy theory now? Yeah, it was nothing about saving jobs . . . it was all just for the union. Throw that on the gigantic pile of conspiracy theories: -Obama was born in Kenya! -Women have a magical rape contraception system! -The unemployment numbers were rigged by 'Chicago Boys' -Evolution is a myth! Believe creationism! -Agenda 21 is a secret world government plan to take over the USA! -These polling numbers need to be 'unskewed' -Obama is a secret Muslim! -Saddam has phantom stockpiles of WMDs so we need to invade! -Climate change is a hoax invented by scientists! Live by the conspiracy theory, die by the conspiracy theory. And that is what happened to Mitt Romney last night. He pushed the conspiracy theory of Obama never called the Libya attack an 'act of terror'. He got fact-checked was HUMILIATED ON NATIONAL TELEVISION. GOP save yourselves. Stop with the conspiracy theories!
        • 2 Years Ago
        [blocked]
      Diz
      • 2 Years Ago
      Drilling is up ONLY on private lands. Obama's EPA has stopped all drilling on FEDERAL lands. Care to guess how impossible it is to get permits to drill on fed land? I'll tell you - To the point where it is not worth the effort. If re-elected, Obama's EPA is coming after those drilling/fracking on private lands as well. Keystone was stopped dead in its tracks by an Obama signature. Think about those thousands of jobs when you tout Obama "saving" the UAW.
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Diz
        [blocked]
        jtav2002
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Diz
        I suppose you're going to quote Romney's claim of drilling being down 14% under Obama too, aren't you? Look further into that statistic. It's only for 2010-2011, when the BP oil spill was and drilling stopped in the Gulf. What a coincidence. Drilling is still up 10% in spite of this under Obama. Not sure what the bailouts have to do with your argument. Millions of jobs vs thousands of temporary jobs. Hmm. Which is more important. Also, Obama even tapped into oil reserves a couple years ago when prices first spiked under him, and it had no effect. Yet people are still going to imply he has any control or has made policies to directly effect the price of gas. Gas is expensive EVERYWHERE in the world save for places like Saudi Arabia, etc. I suppose that's his fault too?
        Spec
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Diz
        Diz . . . you are spewing a lot of false information. You look just as stupid as Romney did when he got totally busted for lying about Obama allegedly not saying 'act of terror'. The GOP is destroying itself by living in a world of false information. You step out in the real world and you look like a bunch of conspiracy theory lunatics.
      Bill
      • 2 Years Ago
      For all of you blind people hailing Romney, remember three things: 1.) this is NOT the same Romney we saw during the primaries, no matter what he, Ryan or the other Republicans want people to believe (all of the Republicans he fought during the primaries had a lot of bad things to say about him, but now suddenly seem to have amnesia), but the real Romney will return if elected and the Tea Party knows this, that's why they are not being very vocal right now, 2.) if elected, Romney will run up the debt, because he CANNOT pay for his tax cuts for the rich (which all Republicans do when elected) and he will get us into a war based on a culture of fear (which all Republicans do to keep people from paying attention to what they are doing in the US) and 3.) Just like with Reagan and Bush Sr. (ran up the debt to fix the economy and then left it for Clinton to fix) and then Bush Jr. (had a surplus from Clinton, but screwed it up and left it for Obama to fix), the US will elect a Democrat to come in and fix the issue, but expect that he/she should be able to do it overnight, which is impossible. Just remember people, it usually takes a lot longer to fix a problem than it does to create it, and Bush Jr. left us with one heck of problem, but we are starting to bounce back (unemployment is going down, the housing market is bouncing back, automotive sales are strong, consumer confidence is rising, etc.) and if we return to the Republican way of doing things, not only will we kill any forward progress we have made, but we might end up in a depression this time. Is Obama or Romney the real answer for America’s problems? No, but until we are ready for real serious change in this country, and it is obvious we are not even close to being ready for that, the Democratic Party is the best solution we have at the moment
        Zoom
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Bill
        The nuts are quiet on Romney because they know he will just sign anything they put in front of him. He wouldn't want to face their wrath. Obama, I wish he would challenge the GOP more. He had ample opportunity for calling out Ryan and the GOP obstructionists last night, and he didn't. They've blocked everything he's tried to do. Then they say he could have done it during the first two years. 1. Al Franken's election was in court for MONTHS due to GOP obstruction, and 2. Ted Kennedy passed away not long after they did have the 60 votes to overcome the filibuster-abusing GOP. McConnell said from the start their NUMBER ONE priority was defeating the President. NOT Creating Jobs. NOT saving industry. NOT reigning in the debt. NOT protecting Social Security or Medicare. NOT fixing any of the myriad of problems they've caused. Why Obama doesn't talk more about the obstruction I'll never know.
        Zoom
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Bill
        The nuts are quiet on Romney because they know he will just sign anything they put in front of him. He wouldn't want to face their wrath. Obama, I wish he would challenge the GOP more. He had ample opportunity for calling out Ryan and the GOP obstructionists last night, and he didn't. They've blocked everything he's tried to do. Then they say he could have done it during the first two years. 1. Al Franken's election was in court for MONTHS due to GOP obstruction, and 2. Ted Kennedy passed away not long after they did have the 60 votes to overcome the filibuster-abusing GOP. McConnell said from the start their NUMBER ONE priority was defeating the President. NOT Creating Jobs. NOT saving industry. NOT reigning in the debt. NOT protecting Social Security or Medicare. NOT fixing any of the myriad of problems they've caused. Why Obama doesn't talk more about the obstruction I'll never know.
        Zoom
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Bill
        The nuts are quiet on Romney because they know he will just sign anything they put in front of him. He wouldn't want to face their wrath. Obama, I wish he would challenge the GOP more. He had ample opportunity for calling out Ryan and the GOP obstructionists last night, and he didn't. They've blocked everything he's tried to do. Then they say he could have done it during the first two years. 1. Al Franken's election was in court for MONTHS due to GOP obstruction, and 2. Ted Kennedy passed away not long after they did have the 60 votes to overcome the filibuster-abusing GOP. McConnell said from the start their NUMBER ONE priority was defeating the President. NOT Creating Jobs. NOT saving industry. NOT reigning in the debt. NOT protecting Social Security or Medicare. NOT fixing any of the myriad of problems they've caused. Why Obama doesn't talk more about the obstruction I'll never know.
      • 2 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        A_Guy
        • 2 Years Ago
        Because oil companies don't want cheap gas. kthxbai
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          [blocked]
        j5
        • 2 Years Ago
        Dude, are you 12? I seriously hope so, because if you're a decision-making adult, things are worse than I thought :(. No, I don't just disagree with you because you "don't like" a certain candidate or party; it's that you seem to have completely bought a bunch of consecutive lies that are easily fact-checked. 1. Obama is NOT a "socialist". There are ACTUAL socialist heads of state that laugh their asses off when they hear that. On the political spectrum, our "Left Wing" here in the US is actually right of center compared to the rest of humanity. Here's an idea of where the candidates stood in 2008: http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2008 And in 2012: http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012 Obama has moved waaaay to the right on things in order to appeal to more Americans, who are some of the most conservative people in the western world. What a socialist is: http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/faq.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism Next, you suggest that things are the way they are because "rich people" are "pissed off". Just so we're clear, you're basically saying that we shouldn't make the wealthy angry, because they feed us? Really? Isn't that a bit like saying, "don't bring in anti-bullying people because it will make the bullies mad, and then they'll beat us up more"? I don't think anyone is "against" wealthy people. Warren Buffet is wealthy, but he's giving away 99% of his fortune. Bill Gates, more than half. There are many wealthy people who also believe that becoming wealthy came not only from hard work and sacrifice, but from a lot of help along the way. I'll ALWAYS trust a rich guy who was poor once, and knows what a package of Ramen noodles with Tabasco sauce tastes like. (It tastes just like poverty, by the way.) I'll ALWAYS be skeptical of a rich person who has never known what it was like to struggle with basic human needs. Lastly, regardless of how much "reserve" we have of ANY energy source, it's *finite*, and its production is *completely controlled* by a very small number of humungous companies that will control its distribution to maximize profits. Is that evil? No. I mean, that's what a company is *supposed* to do: sell their product where they can make it as expensive as possible. Does that have to do with "rich people being pissed off"? Not unless you're on a junior-high debate team, and even then, I'm not so sure. Please educate yourself, then grow up.
        Spec
        • 2 Years Ago
        "If Obama is so great then why does the gas price stay high?" Really? Basic economics. If the economy is good then people have money to spend on gasoline. The increased demand pushes the price up. Romney pointed out that gas was cheap 4 years ago. He was quite correct. Of course it was cheap because we were in a world-wide financial meltdown that drove demand super-low. If the GOP's great plan is to cause another world-wide financial meltdown to bring down gas price then count me out.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          [blocked]
          Spec
          • 2 Years Ago
          @Spec
          Yes, the fact that people are afford to buy near $4/gallon gasoline is an indication the economy is doing somewhat OK. And guess what . . . if the unemployment rate continues going down, gasoline is going to become more expensive and more and more workers buy gas to drive to their jobs. Basic economics, deal with it. Any politician that promises you otherwise is blowing smoke up your butt.
      Zoom
      • 2 Years Ago
      Americans will not fall for the GOP spin. Extra oil production in the US will just feed the global supply chain. Maybe prices would come down $.50 if we doubled oil production. Maybe not. If the price goes down, demand will go up and vice versa. If demand goes down, the price will go down and vice versa. Rmoney should definitely understand this, being the big shot business man and all. It's something any high school economics text book covers. In 2008, global demand collapsed, and prices tumbled to under $2/gal. I suppose going back to the dog days are economic decline is to Rmoney's preference, since he is espousing policies that would lead us there, but I think most Americans (aside from the 1% who want to buy up everything really cheap - homes, property, etc) do not want to return to the late '08/early '09 days. Obama nailed it when he mentioned global demand. He also nailed it on the bailout. Rmoney wanted to let the companies go through normal bankruptcy, which would have caused them to shut down. Shutting down would have resulted in countless suppliers going under too, which is why Ford, Toyota and so on did not wince at the bailout, even though it kept their competitors alive. You think for one second if allowing GM/Chrysler to shut would have been a good thing those companies would've cried foul. They didn't. They knew the stakes. Rmoney probably wanted them to fail so they could buy assets for a couple of pennies on the dollar, so his corporate investment friends could make out like bandits like they always have, while good paying jobs get shipped overseas. When you build a fortune on others' failure you should not be trusted to run the gov't.
        MAX
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Zoom
        I wonder how many of these businesses Romney took over were purposely failed? Check out the Overstock.com vs Goldman Sachs court case. http://www.overstock.com/50257/static.html It's sad one of these leverage buyout crooks is all the Republican party can offer America after the Bush/Cheney debacle.
      Recce Flyer
      • 2 Years Ago
      Bailing out failing companies when there are successful ones, like FORD, only penalizes the well managed companies, circumvents capitalism, spends my tax dollars for pure politcal gain and raising the debt. The people decided those companies didn't make good products and voted with their wallets. The president vetoed that and took their money and gave it to them anyway. Saved the banks too while he was at it. Nothing like the hand out generation.
        A_Guy
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Recce Flyer
        AAAAANNND..Bush put all of it into motion, did you forget that? NO PRESIDENT would have ever let the auto industry collapse because that is like pulling a leg off a chair and trusting the person sitting in it won't fall.
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          [blocked]
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          [blocked]
          over9000
          • 2 Years Ago
          @A_Guy
          my point is, did the energy sector collapse? No it didn't.
        GR
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Recce Flyer
        You do realize that FORD also asked the government to bailout GM and Chrysler, right? The reason is because if those two companies went under there would've been massive layoffs not only at those companies, but tons of smaller auto suppliers nationwide, which would in turn affect Ford. I'd much rather have my tax money go to help stabilize an American auto company that actually makes things and employs hundreds of thousands of people nationwide, than going to more tax breaks for the richest Americans and subsidies for large oil and gas companies. You may not agree with where the money went, but time is showing that that decision was the right one.
        reattadudes
        • 2 Years Ago
        @Recce Flyer
        perhaps you're not aware that Ford isn't quite the successful company you think it is. did you know Ford got a huge infusion of cash thru a private equity loan just weeks before the crash in September of 2008? Ford closed on their loan first; GM and Chrysler had their private loans in the pipeline, too, but the market crashed before the loans could be funded. Ford also received another 15.8 billion from the bailout money that you don't think they took to prop up its failing Ford Motor Credit unit, a wholly owned Ford subsidiary. and tell me about how "successful" Ford is. their sales don't have anywhere close to the growth that GM and Chrysler do. sorry to confuse the issue with REAL facts. you also seem to forget that when GM and Chrysler were asking for money, Ford, Toyota, Subaru, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai, Volkswagen, and BMW were encouraging the US Government to give GM and Chrysler the money they requested. why? they all depend on the same suppliers. if Chrysler and GM went under, one of two things would have happened: 1) the suppliers would have gone out of business, as they operate on razor thin margins, and depend on sheer volume to survive. 2) costs to the other companies would have increased dramatically.
      paulwesterberg
      • 2 Years Ago
      Domestic drilling increased dramatically under Obama. Despite increased production gasoline prices have not fallen. Oil companies are making record profits and shipping excess petroleum to Europe to keep domestic prices high. Why would they sell it for $3-$4 a gallon here when they can get $5(Before Taxes!) per gallon in the UK!?
        kevsflanagan
        • 2 Years Ago
        @paulwesterberg
        Hush your logic and reasoning are sound.. we can not have that here!
    • Load More Comments