Jennifer Granholm says Americans should expect to pay higher heating costs this winter (link)

Cosmos

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
25,446
17,957
1
Nothing like a self-inflicted wound...


This winter is going to be a b_tch for most people. Like we can all just go outside and flip the switch to solar panels and wind mills. And hey Jennifer, what ever happened to drilling our own oil in order to reduce our reliance on "unfriendly countries." We have become California on a national level. Total cluster f_ck and democrats are going to pay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jerry

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
4,372
7,119
1
Nothing like a self-inflicted wound...


This winter is going to be a b_tch for most people. Like we can all just go outside and flip the switch to solar panels and wind mills. And hey Jennifer, what ever happened to drilling our own oil in order to reduce our reliance on "unfriendly countries." We have become California on a national level. Total cluster f_ck and democrats are going to pay.
Under what laws of nature is Jennifer Granholm in charge of anything?

She's a complete moron (as are most politicians) - she couldn't tie her own shoes.

Yet, in this country of 340 million people, she's the best we can find to be "Energy Secretary"?

So, no real engineers of physicists were available? No smart people.

Just political scumbags.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmos and Jerry

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
4,372
7,119
1
We've come a long way from the energy independence we enjoyed during the Trump administration.

If you voted for Biden you are an idiot.
You mean, "If you voted for the deep state, knowing Biden was incompetent, that's excusable, but if you STILL think they're competent.....you are an idiot"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmos

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
43,489
15,121
1
This winter is going to be a b_tch for most people. Like we can all just go outside and flip the switch to solar panels and wind mills. And hey Jennifer, what ever happened to drilling our own oil in order to reduce our reliance on "unfriendly countries." We have become California on a national level. Total cluster f_ck and democrats are going to pay.
Really? Based on the numbers below, a 30% increase from last year means a $173 increase for the ENTIRE Winter. Most lower to middle income families are getting more than that a month with the advanced child care credit the Dems passed.

US households that rely on natural gas for heating could spend an average of $746 to heat their homes this winter, up 30% from last winter, according to the Energy Information Administration.
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,345
8,151
1
We have become California on a national level. Total cluster f_ck and democrats are going to pay.

I don't think they will pay. This is part of the master plan to become part of a globalist government, and these guys want to be a part of it.

So here's how it will go: With soaring food and energy prices, people will go cold and Hungary this winter. Many will become impoverished.

But look what happened at the same time: Central banks pumped in huge sums to create wealthy corporations, which will now have to raise prices to justify those valuations and maybe layoff workers (stagflation).

Government to the rescue next year ahead of the elections: All of those people suffering through this will be promised government money while the government blames greedy corporations for inflation.

Bank on it. And people will vote for them. By then all of the illegals may be voting on top of this.

It is the master plan.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Cosmos and NJPSU

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,345
8,151
1
Really? Based on the numbers below, a 30% increase from last year means a $173 increase for the ENTIRE Winter. Most lower to middle income families are getting more than that a month with the advanced child care credit the Dems passed.

US households that rely on natural gas for heating could spend an average of $746 to heat their homes this winter, up 30% from last winter, according to the Energy Information Administration.

What are the people on fixed incomes getting?
 

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
43,489
15,121
1
I don't think they will pay. This is part of the master plan to become part of a globalist government, and these guys want to be a part of it.

So here's how it will go: With soaring food and energy prices, people will go cold and Hungary this winter. Many will become impoverished.

But look what happened at the same time: Central banks pumped in huge sums to create wealthy corporations, which will now have to raise prices to justify those valuations and maybe layoff workers (stagflation).

Government to the rescue next year ahead of the elections: All of those people suffering through this will be promised government money while the government blames greedy corporations for inflation.

Bank on it. And people will vote for them. By then all of the illegals may be voting on top of this.

It is the master plan.
You’ve gone full Alex Jones. “The Globalists!”
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,345
8,151
1
Social Security will pay out 5.9% more in 2022. Some I- bonds are paying north of 7% for the next six months.

You ignored the question. Social security is not a fixed income. There are people living on bonds and pensions. Those were bought when the government said it would adhere to a 2% inflation target. Then last year they changed it to an average target. Then, this year, it seems they abandoned even that under cover of the word "transitory."

Your model totally ignores the government's default on those assets by lying about its inflation rate and plans. Not only the target, but the constant manipulation of the basis and the ignoring of food and energy, the two highest contributors. Of course the rest of costs, such as repairs and insurance, will follow.

Many seniors on fixed incomes cannot risk big losses in other parts of their portfolio, yet this is exactly what they are doing right now due to negative real interest rates, and it is very dangerous.

It was a horrible policy to continue handing out money under negative rates, printing money for banks, while companies cannot find workers and food/energy costs are soaring.

This is very disruptive, dangerous, and unnecessary. There is no stability in this country's debt/GDP now. This can't continue and it will end badly. Financial markets have been turned into a casino. Look at what is happening today. Crypto is soaring. That's the new gold, the thing people turn to when they have lost all confidence in governments.

If you think this is all good you are truly nuts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmos and Jerry

Jerry

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
4,661
9,903
1
Nothing like a self-inflicted wound...


This winter is going to be a b_tch for most people. Like we can all just go outside and flip the switch to solar panels and wind mills. And hey Jennifer, what ever happened to drilling our own oil in order to reduce our reliance on "unfriendly countries." We have become California on a national level. Total cluster f_ck and democrats are going to pay.

Laughing Girl doesn't care: Yeah, that's right, we decreased domestic energy production, made the country dependent on OPEC again, raised prices at the pump big-time, hiked the cost of natural gas by 30%...now shut up and suck on it, serfs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmos

NJPSU

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
43,489
15,121
1
You ignored the question. Social security is not a fixed income. There are people living on bonds and pensions. Those were bought when the government said it would adhere to a 2% inflation target. Then last year they changed it to an average target. Then, this year, it seems they abandoned even that under cover of the word "transitory."

Your model totally ignores the government's default on those assets by lying about its inflation rate and plans. Not only the target, but the constant manipulation of the basis and the ignoring of food and energy, the two highest contributors. Of course the rest of costs, such as repairs and insurance, will follow.

Many seniors on fixed incomes cannot risk big losses in other parts of their portfolio, yet this is exactly what they are doing right now due to negative real interest rates, and it is very dangerous.

It was a horrible policy to continue handing out money under negative rates, printing money for banks, while companies cannot find workers and food/energy costs are soaring.

This is very disruptive, dangerous, and unnecessary. There is no stability in this country's debt/GDP now. This can't continue and it will end badly. Financial markets have been turned into a casino. Look at what is happening today. Crypto is soaring. That's the new gold, the thing people turn to when they have lost all confidence in governments.

If you think this is all good you are truly nuts.
I never said it was all good but it’s certainly not the disaster that you are portraying it as. You can pick any economic environment and find a small subset of society that isn’t thriving under it.

Never has the lower working class in society had as much power and earning potential as they do right now. They can go anywhere and get $15/hr or more. The boss treat like crap they can find another job on the same day.
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
8,345
8,151
1
I never said it was all good but it’s certainly not the disaster that you are portraying it as. You can pick any economic environment and find a small subset of society that isn’t thriving under it.

Never has the lower working class in society had as much power and earning potential as they do right now. They can go anywhere and get $15/hr or more. The boss treat like crap they can find another job on the same day.

I'm fine with that for workers, as long as a business is not competing with taxpayers, extended unemployment benefits, etc. That's not a market economy. That's a socialist economy. And when socialism starts, it grows. It breeds dependency.

You don't understand market concepts because you do not trust a capitalist system. You believe government should manage the economy, instead of what its true role should be -- to maintain equitable rules for competition within an economy -- then stay out of the way. And that "regulation" especially includes the securities and banking part of it as long as government has the ability to print its currency.

Creating bubbles in markets while not allowing bad businesses to fail via easy money does nothing for overall living standards. Shutting businesses down by decree and then handing out money is not supposed to be the role of government. Forcing businesses to manage vaccine decrees is not the role of government. Government is not there to create winners and losers. That's for people to decide as a consequence of their actions, without government interference.

You advocate for the government to take care of people while you sit back with money that the government essentially handed you through quantitative easing. And you can't see a problem with this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmos

Latest posts