Tweety Bird said:
I'm so confused.
Do high energy prices destroy our economy because they eat up so much disposable income?
Or do low energy prices destroy our economy because they discourage domestic production?
On the tax angle: I don't know about your locale but here in Donut Center, the taxes are a fixed amount per gallon. Prices can go up or down but the tax per gallon doesn't change. So it seems to me that if the overall price of a gallon is less, people will buy more gallons, resulting in a tax revenue boost. Is my thinking flawed here?
And if people have to spend less of their income on energy, won't they have more money for other things, like food, refrigerators, automobiles, investments or savings accounts?
Gawd, I get so tired of the doomsday talk.
ENERGY PRICES UP! IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD. IT'S BUSH'S FAULT.
ENERGY PRICES IN THE TANK! IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD. IT'S OBAMA'S FAULT.
Economics is not a finite science. In many cases things DO seem contradictory at 1st glance, but the devil is always in the details. I'm not an economist, but let me provide for you the reasoning behind my opinion that the economy isn't going to react well to VERY low crude prices: (The definition of 'very low' being prices sufficiently low enough to force US oil producers to shut in wells and lay people off)
Lower energy prices (in general) are good for a healthy economy. High energy prices are (in general) not good for any economy because the high prices claim more disposable income. Easy enough to comprehend. If the economy is healthy and stable in other areas, then higher energy prices will have a modest negative impact. However, if the economy is not healthy
and is limping along largely due to the huge oil recovery business, then it's no stretch to predict a downside that has more negatives than positives when that oil recovery slows down due to oil producers shutting in wells. I'm in the oil, gas & power generation business. I have seen this done over & over throughout my career.
In our current situation (as I see it), the economy is NOT healthy by any definition. Oil extraction & production have a lot of 'trickle down' economic benefits. Workers rent housing or stay in hotels. Restaurants, laundry, bars, and a plethora of other businesses will flourish in areas where oil production is happening. Equipment used for oil recovery rattles and hums along, breaks and wears out which presents a demand for goods & services associated with that aspect of the business. The 'trickle down' goes on & on...
Strong economic states where the oil & gas recovery is taking place WILL suffer with low oil prices if these jobs start going away due to the reduced production requirements. It's just a fact of the business. As a producer, you reach a point where the market value of the oil is lower than your costs to extract it. When that happens, you've got no choice but what to shut in wells and lay workers off. That's not good. And we must remember that gasoline isn't the only 'customer' for oil. Manufacturing uses oil products in great quantities. But if employment is down and there are less people to buy products, then the benefits of low oil prices in those markets are also tempered by the reduction of consumers.
Now then... Oil is important, but it's not the only energy game in town. Guess what else is going on? The Obama administration is expanding the authority of the EPA, and they're going to start pulling the emission ceiling down which will put MORE energy producers out of business. There are literally thousands of new regulations going into effect in 2015, and a significant percentage of those impact the energy business either directly or indirectly. We know the administration is after coal, which is a cheap source of energy for electricity producers. There are no new nuclear plants being built that I know of, so it's pretty clear that the price of electricity is going to go up. That's bad because it starts to eat up the disposable income that was made available by the low gasoline prices. Besides which - Obama is on the record stating that his energy policy would 'necessarily cause energy prices to skyrocket'. A campaign promise or reality? I bet on reality.
So the 64000 dollar question is: Will the benefits of the lower oil prices be enough to outweigh the expected loss of jobs, and the rise in electricity prices (and other energy costs that increase due to the EPA regulations) ?
My crystal ball says the economy will not be happy with the loss in oil production, since that production & all its by-products are a significant part of what
drives this economy right now. It's a delicate balance in a feeble economy.
As to your question about consumers buying more gasoline - Yes, tax revenues will increase as the quantity of gasoline purchased goes up if the taxes are static. (e.g. Not tied to the retail price of the fuel) Good for gubmint, but those increases in tax revenues do not necessarily translate into a healthy economy. The Federal Government has grossed more tax revenue this year than they ever have, but it hasn't made the US economy all happy & joyous has it? Sure, there are trickle down effects that
are positive. If people are hired, that's a plus. If government buys goods & services from the free market, then it's also a plus. But if the additional revenue is already spent on paying down debt or back room 'black hole' projects, then there is no measurable benefit to the economy. So your question would require more info about your particular local economy to answer accurately.
Again - all in my opinion of course!
